Fiscal host or formal governance process

nemobis commented

2024-03-26 13:22:39 +01:00

In order to avoid a situation like Gitea going rogue, it would be nice to have a legally codified governance model with an incorporated entity. Something like Forgejo's host (the Codeberg association itself) could work, but given the hectic times it might be easier to jump aboard a compatible FLOSS foundation.

Benefits include:

making certain assets like domain names and trademarks explicitly commonly owned;
handling legal liability;
handling financial matters including donations;
simplifying best practices like a succession plan.

In order to avoid a situation like Gitea going rogue, it would be nice to have a legally codified governance model with an incorporated entity. Something like [Forgejo's host](https://forgejo.org/faq/#who-owns-the-forgejo-domains-and-trademarks) (the Codeberg association itself) could work, but given the hectic times it might be easier to jump aboard a compatible [FLOSS foundation](https://flossfoundations.org/foundation-directory/). Benefits include: - making certain assets like domain names and trademarks explicitly commonly owned; - handling legal liability; - handling financial matters including donations; - simplifying best practices like a succession plan.

👍 1

ddevault commented

2024-03-26 13:26:53 +01:00

Owner

This may or may not be useful, but I will state for the record that the purpose of the LGPL here is a much stronger promise of the future freedom of the project than Forgejo's approach, and that the model for Redict is deliberately leaning into a decentralized and common ownership over the project.

This may or may not be useful, but I will state for the record that the purpose of the LGPL here is a *much stronger* promise of the future freedom of the project than Forgejo's approach, and that the model for Redict is deliberately leaning into a decentralized and common ownership over the project.

nemobis commented

2024-03-26 13:53:32 +01:00

Author

The LGPL (or copyright more generally) doesn't protect the community from an entity taking over the names, domain names and infrastructure, which is big part of what Redis Labs did.

ddevault commented

2024-03-26 13:55:21 +01:00

Owner

That's true, but it does force the source code to remain free as in freedom even if that were to come to pass, which imho is the most important part. I want to find strength in bringing an important tool like redict out of the hands of legal entities and into the hands of people.

nemobis commented

2024-03-26 14:06:18 +01:00

Author

I'm afraid that

decentralized and common ownership over the project

and

out of the hands of legal entities and into the hands of people

are contradictory goals, in our existing legal system.

Who owns redict.io and the Redict name? You might say "the community", but in practice I suspect right now it's "Drew DeVault". Ultimately, WIPO decides.

I understand where you're coming from and indeed I'm one of three persons who previously managed to reclaim a proposed trademark for public ownership. However, it's exceedingly rare to find examples of trademarks being fully neutralised without expensive court battles. It's far easier to assert ownership and assign it to a suitably commons-friendly entity.

In particular, I'm not sure why you hold "legal entities" and "people" to be polar opposites, but if your objective is to make sure that individual persons be copyright holders and also control the governance and assets of the project, there are ways of doing that. For example, instead of an association or foundation, you could have a cooperative established in a friendly jurisdiction where the law guarantees one person one vote. You could make sure that the voting members and the authors are largely the same people, and prohibit legal entities from being members.

I'm afraid that > decentralized and common ownership over the project and > out of the hands of legal entities and into the hands of people are contradictory goals, in our existing legal system. Who owns redict.io and the Redict name? You might say "the community", but in practice I suspect right now it's "Drew DeVault". Ultimately, WIPO decides. I understand where you're coming from and indeed I'm one of three persons who previously managed to [reclaim a proposed trademark](https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Logo/Reclaim_the_Logo) for public ownership. However, it's exceedingly rare to find examples of trademarks being fully neutralised without expensive court battles. It's far easier to assert ownership and assign it to a suitably [commons-friendly entity](https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/governing-the-commons/A8BB63BC4A1433A50A3FB92EDBBB97D5). In particular, I'm not sure why you hold "legal entities" and "people" to be polar opposites, but if your objective is to make sure that individual persons be copyright holders and also control the governance and assets of the project, there are ways of doing that. For example, instead of an association or foundation, you could have a cooperative established in a friendly jurisdiction where the law guarantees one person one vote. You could make sure that the voting members and the authors are largely the same people, and prohibit legal entities from being members.

👍 1

ddevault commented

2024-03-26 14:10:19 +01:00

Owner

Fair enough, I'll defer to your expertise and experience with the matter. And indeed the present-day answer to "who owns the domain name" is "Drew DeVault", though I have not registered a trademark and do not intend to.

I'm interested in looking into these options in the future, though for now I want to focus on getting the fork in a working and shippable state. And, though there are a number of contributors working on Redict right now, it's unclear who among them might constitute a "leadership", as it were, and therefore should be consulted on joining or forming a foundation, particularly if they would need to be members of, say, a cooperative.

Fair enough, I'll defer to your expertise and experience with the matter. And indeed the present-day answer to "who owns the domain name" is "Drew DeVault", though I have not registered a trademark and do not intend to. I'm interested in looking into these options in the future, though for now I want to focus on getting the fork in a working and shippable state. And, though there are a number of contributors working on Redict right now, it's unclear who among them might constitute a "leadership", as it were, and therefore should be consulted on joining or forming a foundation, particularly if they would need to be members of, say, a cooperative.

❤️ 1

nemobis commented

2024-03-26 15:14:35 +01:00

Author

Alright. I just want to say that I'm available to provide help, especially if you need someone in Finland to set up a cooperative according to Finnish law.

Alright. I just want to say that I'm available to provide help, especially if you need someone in Finland to [set up a cooperative according to Finnish law](https://startcooperative.pellervo.fi/should-we-start-a-cooperative-and-do-business-together/).

Rows
Columns

Fiscal host or formal governance process #32